Microsoft coverage: tell us what you want

What would you like to see more or less of in our Microsoft coverage? Drop …

You've likely noticed that our coverage of Microsoft (non-gaming) has picked up quite a bit over the past year, thanks in large part to contributions from Peter Bright who has joined Emil Protalinski on One Microsoft Way. Peter and I were recently discussing future projects, and we both thought it would be a great idea to solicit from you, dear reader, thoughts on what we should and should not be covering in the world of Microsoft.

Microsoft is a massive company with more products than 99.9 percent of the population can name. Despite so many products, it's often hard to determine what is best to cover. Many, many moons ago we sought to cover nearly all of the daily "news," but it was frankly quite boring (and you told us as much, in both feedback and traffic). Patch Tuesday is the most uninteresting (and predictable!) "news" on earth, but some people would argue that it's essential information. Point updates and patches to enterprise products can be pretty snoretastic as well. But readers seemed to respond well to big releases, consumer product news, and strategy/direction analysis.

When thinking about what you'd like to see us cover, keep in mind that there are really two kinds of things we do here at Ars: there's the daily news mill, and then there are long-form features. We're looking for suggestions on both. For those of you who read other tech sites that address Microsoft, it would be fantastic if you linked to stories you wished we covered but didn't. It's one thing to say you want more enterprise news. It's quite another to link some examples of what you think counts as worthwhile examples of enterprise coverage.

As usual, Peter and I will be in the discussion section, so don't hesitate to ask questions if you've got them.

I have doubts that the average Ars reader is involved in corporate computing (since it appears to have a more mainstream userbase than when it started).

I doubt your doubts. I'm involved in it, and I often wish there were useful articles about nifty Sharepoint tricks or other things that I wouldn't normally find out otherwise.

I've been reading Ars since 1996-7 IIRC (my forum account dates to '99 but I had a different one prior to that whose credentials and details I don't remember), so maybe I'm not "mainstream" enough.

All of the Apple coverage does get old at times though, and I'm Apple-agnostic (I use a MBP and OS X, but I hate the iPhone & iPad.)

I'd like to see more in-depth things like how-to articles or tips & tricks for performance. Stuff like all of the new "advanced format" drives and how they interact with a WinXP box, or an explanation of why/how to "Align" an SSD for best performance. This is stuff that may get covered at other sites, but they never really get into a good explanation of why/how it actually works, or they may have information that conflicts with one of the other 20 sites...

Corporate-level things would be good to see as well. A showdown of Hyper-V vs. whatever VMWare's current free offering is... I trust the depth of coverage and thoroughness of an Ars review (especially PetwarBeeeeee) over most other sites.

I similarly suspect that there's more corporate IT folks at Ars than one might think. The nice thing about Ars (vs. say, Slashdot) is that you get analysis of articles that is more analytical than just relying on the submission quip. Not to mention there's no blindly evangelistic *nix slant, the commenting system is better, the conversations move slower, and you're not constantly exposed to Libertarianism-for-Dummies readers in the comments (only in the copyright articles ).

I guess what I'm saying is that Ars is a better site for someone who has spent a lot of time in IT and has the interests that folks in that field often have, vs someone who "is good at computers", but has to get their homework done before their parents get mad.

I'd like to see... well, more of what Peter does now, really. More OS reviews (WHS2 beta, perhaps?), more technology deep-dives, more highly opinionated articles about how something MS is doing is either smart or rubbish, and how their competition is doing that thing differently, in a rubbish or smart way. While I would be interested in some coverage of their enterprise-grade solutions, it's not a high enough priority for me to actually ask for it. If it showed up, I would read with interest, that's about all.

Almost anything written about Microsoft outside of their own press releases and the cheering of the thralls makes me feel like I'm watching the Challenger disaster all over again. Can't do anything to help, and can't help but watch the occasional replays of the tragedy.

I don't have any plausible suggestions for changes in your coverage of that pitiful company, but at least don't add any. It's just not polite.

It's easier to tell you what I don't want: I don't want coverage of MS hardware that isn't even sold outside the US, beyond a blurb or so. I don't care about the Zune or the Kin or whatever, because it doesn't affect me in the slightest. I do care about Windows & Office - not because I particualrly like them (I don't) but because they are important indicators of where the business is heading. The Zune is not, and MS gets a lot of free coverage of their often lackluster efforts just because they are important of the software side.

I'm a fan of the more consumer centric discussions. but MS's real relevance is in the server space. Their enterprise solutions may be boring to some, but for those of us who have to play in this world your coverage keeps us in the loop.

I like the day to day news focused on the consumer stuff and MS's business analysis. But, I'd LOVE to see in depth tear-downs of the server products like you've done with Apple's Snow Leopard. Windows Home server in particular would be nice but also interesting are things done with the latest versions of SQL & SharePoint (workflows & office 10 integration) .

Finally I'd like to put a plug in for anything and everything around virtualization - Microsoft or otherwise. When Lemurs pointed it out it struck me how much I wanted to know more about this quickly evolving space.

It's easier to tell you what I don't want: I don't want coverage of MS hardware that isn't even sold outside the US, beyond a blurb or so. I don't care about the Zune or the Kin or whatever, because it doesn't affect me in the slightest. I do care about Windows & Office - not because I particualrly like them (I don't) but because they are important indicators of where the business is heading. The Zune is not, and MS gets a lot of free coverage of their often lackluster efforts just because they are important of the software side.

That the same tends to happen with Apple on occasion is no excuse.

I would actually quite disagree.

Office and Windows are indicators of where Microsoft is. KIN and Zune are indicators of where Microsoft wants to be (though the company certainly isn't having much luck getting there).

Can we get some sort of magical filter that automatically hands out a 5 day ban to anyone who uses "M$" in their comment?

This. Also "crApple" or any other stupid worn out name calling. I will debate the pros and cons of any tech company or product as long as you want but as soon as you get to the "durr hurr M$ just wants teh monay" posts then there is no longer any point.

I like to see the technical breakdowns of various Windows systems, partly because I program soft real-time apps for Windows at work and it contributes to my knowledge of what affects performance, but also because I think it's just plain interesting. In the same line it's also useful to know when new development features become available.

All-in-all, I think the coverage for the last year or so has been pretty good for me -- I regularly scour the Windows postings for this kind of info, because I know there's a good chance of finding something useful there. I'm fine with y'all keeping it where it's at.

it would be nice if ars covered development tools and languages in as much detail as they do their science articles. latest trends, such as charts of the most used frameworks/languages, changes in version updates of languages/tools/frameworks, new languages (such as google go), why visual basic refuses to die, best practices, performance comparisons... info on their development tools is the main reason i follow 'one microsoft way'... benchmarks make me happy......

>It would be nice to see more stuff going on in microsoft research labs.

Apparently that's not their function. They generate prestige and keep good people away from the competition. Why would Microsoft want to disturb the status quo? In the old days IBM Research had a similar role. They'd investigate and patent. Only when IBM was losing markets would they attempt to deploy. Now and then something like APL would escape because it wasn't product-related.

The most successful lab, PARC, was run by a copier company afraid that computers would result in the paperless office. Of course, we now understand that computers are for generating paper.

A technical result from Microsoft research that could be disruptive might be interesting.

>"Compare PARC to something like Microsoft research," Saffo says. "Microsoft research is an intellectual roach motel: All the big brains check in but nothing ever checks out." He defies me to name a single bigbreakthrough that's come out of Microsoft's R&D efforts and of course I'm stumped.

>Eric Schmidt goes one step further: He challenges me to name a single earth-shaking breakthrough that's come out of any industrial research center over the last 10 years.

Although to be fair, few research labs results shake the earth, and those few only after a long time.

Perhaps I am in the minority but I for one value Emil's Patch Tuesday summaries exactly as they are now.

As for other Microsoft reporting I've been happy with the way things are now but as someone who is more interested in enterprise technologies I'd welcome features that detail new technology like Forefront as well as explain the major evolution in Server 2008 R2 Active Directory and GPO technologies, perhaps even talk about their security analysis tools.

I've been getting my consumer tech fix from Maximum PC for 15 years; I come to Ars because the articles tend to be (or at least used to be) more technical and professional or cover policy issues most tech rags don't. It was some of Jon Stokes' early articles such as the one on CPU Caching (http://arstechnica.com/paedia/index.html) that got me hooked on Ars and the lack of such these days is missed.

I, for one, would like some kind of a deeper presentation of all those cogs and wheels that run my Windows OS. That is, some kind of 101 to Operating System, based on Windows. If this would be done in an evolutionary manner - say, from MS DOS to Win7, it would be really great and inspiring.

I know it actualy could and should be OS-agnostic thing to write, but it's always easier with examples, I guess. And Windows is the most ubiquitous one.

You (ars) had a great stories about all the magic in the CPUs, based on Intel chips; I'm thinking about something similar with regard to OS.

I think Abergon put it best above. You've done remarkably well for dealing with a sellout. Things have changed a bit but you're transparent and still interested in us, that's pretty awesome. The MS stories are mostly great. Anything patch or security related that keeps us all safer (even if we don't use windows) is fine; keep it. The insigyt articles, on corporate culture, strategies, and integrated computing outlook are some of the best writing you guys do. In my opinion, the only place you're slipping is the PR coverage. Just because MS or Goog decide to enter a new field or have an update to a product thuey want everyone to know about, screw em. Half the time theyre not terribly relevant, and the coverage feels forced. It's even worse when it's not an Etc. post. It's similar to when you go to E3, or to when you want to report on some trendy game. Things get covered that are simply awgul in the end, the articles are fluffy and soft, it all seems forced, and the coverage is worthless to us. But these articles are the exceptions; most of your articles are great. The tougher the analysis, the more you usually rise to the occasion.

I want thorough in-depth reviews of Microsoft's shipping products, and I particularly don't want Ars to be playing the game of simply echoing their vaporware announcements, showing a healthy dose of skepticism for their future product announcements, especially given their apparent difficulty executing on those promises. Basically, I want to know about their actual products in great detail where relevant to geeks, and it would be nice if Ars could abstain from giving Microsoft a platform from which to spread their often deceitful PR announcements.

It's easier to tell you what I don't want: I don't want coverage of MS hardware that isn't even sold outside the US, beyond a blurb or so. I don't care about the Zune or the Kin or whatever, because it doesn't affect me in the slightest. I do care about Windows & Office - not because I particualrly like them (I don't) but because they are important indicators of where the business is heading. The Zune is not, and MS gets a lot of free coverage of their often lackluster efforts just because they are important of the software side.

That the same tends to happen with Apple on occasion is no excuse.

I would actually quite disagree.

Office and Windows are indicators of where Microsoft is. KIN and Zune are indicators of where Microsoft wants to be (though the company certainly isn't having much luck getting there).

Yeah, it's pretty obvious that Microsoft really wants to move into the consumer electronics area, but doesn't quite know how to do it. An interesting idea for a feature story might be the history of this effort and an analysis of why they're just so bad at it.

I would like to hear more about WHS, slightly more enterprise software news, Definitely Windows phone 7 news reviews and updates(this one is the most important), and throw in a splash of .net to round it out.

That's exactly what I'd like to see. It's also what PeterB could tell us the most about. I'd also _love_ to see Peter do some in depth discussion of things like Hybrid Threading, Randomized Address implementations, etc. OS level discussion.

It could also be fun to have some reviews of developer tools such as Resharper, various source control.

Ars has had an active dev forum for a while. PeterB is one of the best developers in that forum. Makes sense to me that he write a few dev based articles for the front page.

It's easier to tell you what I don't want: I don't want coverage of MS hardware that isn't even sold outside the US, beyond a blurb or so. I don't care about the Zune or the Kin or whatever, because it doesn't affect me in the slightest. I do care about Windows & Office - not because I particualrly like them (I don't) but because they are important indicators of where the business is heading. The Zune is not, and MS gets a lot of free coverage of their often lackluster efforts just because they are important of the software side.

That the same tends to happen with Apple on occasion is no excuse.

I would actually quite disagree.

Office and Windows are indicators of where Microsoft is. KIN and Zune are indicators of where Microsoft wants to be (though the company certainly isn't having much luck getting there).

Sometimes I think you just can't resist, Peter. You love to debate, even when you and Ken issue an article and create a thread inviting feedback from your readers.

I don't necessarily disagree with you; that is irrelevant. It just seems a bit irksome that you would ask for honest feedback and then start picking it apart before you even have enough data to derive anything useful.

As a programmer (Java, .NET, Android), I would love to see more articles related to the development-side of Microsoft. I'd personally like to see articles like what's new in .NET 4, Windows Phone 7-related articles, and Windows desktop application development.

I think Ars does a good job with product coverage; Windows 7 coverage was great, and Office 2010 coverage was good as well. I also think Ars is at the sweet spot with patch coverage - any more patch coverage would be too much in my opinion.

Your in-depth coverage of Azure was phenomenal, it gave us an IT-level insight into the service Microsoft was trying to provide, and allowed me to "evaulate" the product without having to consume precious cycles actually doing so (if that makes any sense).

Your criticism of Live Sync and it's shortcomings are spot on, it's what I like to read so that I know whether or not to invest my time in a product.

You *definitely* need more coverage of where Microsoft is headed with it's corporate-level offerings, that's for sure, with an eye on it's strengths and weaknesses within a company and what you get for upgrading, implementing, and deploying versus the known and utilized competition.

If there is anything you need less of, it's the marketing crap that floods your inbox reposted in a news story. Dont care to hear about MS vaporware or "initiatives" in god-knows-what until it's up and running and starts bearing fruit.

As a programmer (Java, .NET, Android), I would love to see more articles related to the development-side of Microsoft. I'd personally like to see articles like what's new in .NET 4, Windows Phone 7-related articles, and Windows desktop application development.

I think Ars does a good job with product coverage; Windows 7 coverage was great, and Office 2010 coverage was good as well. I also think Ars is at the sweet spot with patch coverage - any more patch coverage would be too much in my opinion.

Things I'd like to see (and some of which are already covered):- Virtualization- New OS in-depth articles (Siracusa level) for both Server (Business and Home) and Workstation OSes- Consumer level stuff (Zune etc- mice and gadgets don't need to be covered under the Microsoft heading)- Software reviews- 4-6 pages on Office, 1-2 on browsers- Occasional how-tos (liked those when they came up in the Linux section) such as: How to do a full back up of Exchange using builtin tools, how to implement a Golden Triangle with Apple OD, how to migrate to a new machine with a new motherboard WITHOUT reinstalling (I know that is in the Forums, but it's so useful a front page piece would be great), mass deployment, setting up SUS.- Patch Tuesday- could be an Etc link, but I find its useful to get it while I'm here, and a little commentary is always good- Would love some MCE articles: add-ons, techniques, etc. to make it work better.- Windows Mobile: this is going to be a lot of fun as it gets closer, so some heavy coverage up through release would be great- Business developments (earnings reports, etc)- AD management, policy management (and tools related to that)- Less of the announcements about announcements- those could get moved right to Etc. Too fluffy for an article, but sometimes interesting to read about (of course, announcement with another two paragraphs of editorial might be good)- Big enterprise type stuff is good- it's good to be aware of what is out there, even if I won't be touching it now.

PeterB's recent articles have been a good addition to Emil's work. I would still like to see some of Peter's stuff marked as "Analysis/Commentary" (e.g. the article on why Windows Mobile is doomed). But overall I like it when the facts are presented and then a commentary is added.

There's other stuff I'm probably missing, but it's probably covered in other comments.

I don't use many Microsoft products (but am by no means a hater -- life's too short) but have really enjoyed some of Peter's analysis pieces that help explain the position, success and/or failure of Microsoft's more recent efforts. I'm thinking of the articles on Live Sync, Zune, Windows Mobile 7, etc. These are so much more to Ars' strengths, I think, than OCD articles on the technical minutae of some hyper-specialized Microsoft product for some little-heard-from (or cared about) corporate echelon.

1) Start doing articles / short features on using Windows and Windows software. I'd like to see task or purpose-based articles: this is what you can do, these are your options.

Some examples: 1.1) The best way to sync files between computers, what your options are and how to set it up. I recently spent way too much time comparing Dropbox, SpiderOak, SugarSync, Windows Live Mesh, Windows Live Sync, Wuala, FeelHome, FreeFileSync, etc. You guys should do it instead 1.2) An update on the Online Backup scene (I know you did initial review some time ago). 1.3) A shoot out between the available software Blu-Ray players.

Sometimes I think you just can't resist, Peter. You love to debate, even when you and Ken issue an article and create a thread inviting feedback from your readers.

I don't necessarily disagree with you; that is irrelevant. It just seems a bit irksome that you would ask for honest feedback and then start picking it apart before you even have enough data to derive anything useful.

I don't think that our desire for feedback should preclude justifications for other coverage decisions.

Ken Fisher / Ken is the founder & Editor-in-Chief of Ars Technica. A veteran of the IT industry and a scholar of antiquity, Ken studies the emergence of intellectual property regimes and their effects on culture and innovation.